[EM] Why I think IRV isn't a serious alternative 2

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax abd at lomaxdesign.com
Thu Dec 25 12:01:10 PST 2008

At 09:05 AM 12/25/2008, James Gilmour wrote:
>Kristofer Munsterhjelm  > Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2008 8:36 AM
> > Do you think my runoff idea could work, or is it too complex?
>My personal view is that runoff is not desirable and would be an 
>unnecessary and unwanted expense.  I know runoff voting systems are
>used in some other countries, but they are not used at all in the UK.

They are used in places with strong multiparty systems. The UK is a 
two-party system.

>   I am satisfied that there are perfectly adequate "vote once"
>systems available for all public elections, both single-office 
>elections and assembly elections.

If they are good for public elections, why are they *never* used for 
smaller organizations where repeated ballot is easy? Wouldn't it save time?

Yes, advanced methods *can* save time, *if* a majority is still 
required. Otherwise the result can *easily* be one that a majority 
would reject. How often? Depends on the method, I'm sure, but my 
estimate is that it's about one in ten for IRV in nonpartisan 
elections in the U.S. It's pretty easy to show.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list